The miner and trader’s own sourced copper production fell 4% to 705,200 metric tons, while its own sourced cobalt output fell 18% to 26,500 tons.

Glencore left its overall 2024 outlook for copper, a metal needed for energy transition applications, unchanged at between 950,000 and 1.01 million tons.

Its trading division, whose profit hit a record $6.4 billion in 2022, includes coal, oil, liquefied natural gas and related products, as well as metals.

Glencore expects its full-year marketing earnings before interest and tax (EBIT) in the $3 billion-$3.5 billion range, around the top-end of the firm’s long-term forecast range of $2.2 billion to $3.2 billion.

The miner has kept its coal business after concluding the purchase of Teck Resources’ coking coal assets and securing backing from a majority of its investors who see lucrative earnings from the fossil fuel.

CEO Gary Nagle in August said the company could acquire more steelmaking coal.

It is one of the largest producers and exporters of thermal coal, with an expected output of between 98 million and 106 million tons this year. It produced 73.1 million tons so far, 7% lower than year-ago levels.

Its 2024 steelmaking coal production should increase to 19 million-21 million tons post-acquisition, from 7 million-9 million tons.

(Reporting by Clara Denina; Editing by Jason Neely and Sherry Jacob-Phillips)

The study, published just a day after the United Nations warned the world is falling “miles short” of what’s needed to curb devastating global warming, indicates that an investment of $78 trillion will be needed to change this course and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.

Under the 2015 Paris Agreement, nations committed to limiting global warming to “well below” two degrees Celsius above the average temperatures recorded between 1850 and 1900, aiming for a target of 1.5 degrees Celsius if feasible. Efforts to date have not succeeded in meeting this challenge, the annual “Energy Transition Outlook” from Wood Mackenzie shows.

Unlike the UN pessimistic outlook, the Scottish consultancy believes that while major obstacles hinder short-term targets, particularly for 2030, a 2050 net-zero goal remains feasible. Immediate and coordinated global action would be necessary, WoodMac warns.

Threats to climate progress

A series of global crises, including the Russia-Ukraine conflict, escalating Middle East violence, rising populism in Europe and global trade tensions with China, are undermining the pace of the energy transition, Wood Mackenzie’s vice president head of scenarios and technologies, Prakash Sharma, said. 

He explains that without urgent policy changes and enhanced investment, a warming trajectory of 2.5˚C to 3˚C could become inevitable.

“We are under no illusion as to how challenging the net zero transition will be, given the fact that fossil fuels are widely available, cost-competitive and deeply embedded in today’s complex energy system,” Sharma added. “A price on carbon maybe the most effective way to drive emissions reduction but it’s hard to see it coming together in a polarized environment.”

Key investment are needed across several critical areas, according to WoodMac. As renewable energy sources grow, substantial upgrades to power supply and grid infrastructure are essential to meet the growing demand. Additionally, the need for critical minerals, such as lithium, nickel and cobalt, is projected to increase five- to ten-fold by 2050, as demand for batteries and other technologies essential for the energy transition continues to grow. 

WoodMac sees the need to back the development of emerging technologies, including carbon capture, low-carbon hydrogen, and nuclear power, are vital for facilitating the shift towards cleaner energy sources.

Securing this funding won’t be easy, the consultants noted. “Doubling annual investments to $3.5 trillion by 2050 will be necessary in our net zero scenario,” Sharma said, adding that it will require unprecedented policy coordination globally.

The role of electrification

The electrification of energy systems will play a pivotal role in decarbonization. Transitioning from fossil fuels to electric power, Wood Mackenzie forecasts that electricity’s share of global energy demand will increase from 23% to 35% by 2050 in a base case, and could reach as high as 55% in a net-zero scenario.

Wood Mackenzie’s analysis reveals that global energy demand is set to rise by 14% by 2050. Emerging economies are projected to see even steeper growth at 45%, driven by rising populations and economic advancement. 

In parallel, data centres, electric vehicles, and AI are emerging as new drivers of electricity consumption, with AI-related energy use alone expected to increase from 500 TWh in 2023 to up to 4,500 TWh by 2050.

Including renewable energy source to meet electrifications demand could help reduce emissions, the report says.

According to Wood Mackenzie, solar and wind currently account for 17% of the global power supply, and renewables capacity is expected to double by 2030 in its base case. Yet, this increase still falls short of the COP28 commitment made in 2023 to triple renewables by 2030.

Transition or coexistence?

While nuclear energy holds promise for providing consistent, zero-carbon electricity, its high cost and frequent project delays pose significant challenges. WoodMac says that nuclear power could play a more significant role as it has attracted interest, particularly from tech companies looking to power data centres sustainably.

While fossil fuels is expected to plateau in the 2040s before beginning a gradual decline, Wood Mackenzie predicts that the high capital costs of low-carbon technologies coupled with strong demand for energy, will require the continued use of oil and gas in the near term.

Wood Mackenzie says to meet climate targets there will be necessary that nations gathered at the COP29 meeting in Azerbaijan next month finalize Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. This section focuses on carbon markets and aims to establish a new climate finance goal to replace the previous annual target of $100 billion, which experts consider insufficient.

The consultancy’s report echoes concerns included in a UN Environment Programme (UNEP) study released last week. The document says the next decade is crucial in the battle against climate change, adding that failing to act now will jeopardize any chance of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. According to the UN body, the current rate of climate action could lead to a catastrophic increase of 3.1 degrees Celsius this century. 

“Either leaders bridge the emissions gap, or we plunge headlong into climate disaster, with the poorest and most vulnerable suffering the most,” Secretary General Antonio Guterres warned.

Even if all existing commitments to reduce emissions are fulfilled, global temperatures would still rise by 2.6 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, experts agree.

CMOC Group Ltd. produced 84,722 tons of cobalt at its mines in Africa in the first nine months of this year, according to the firm’s earnings report late Monday. Its earlier output guidance for all of 2024 was 70,000 tons at the high end.

The faster-than-expected increase has deepened a global cobalt glut and helped send prices tumbling to an eight-year low this month. The Chinese firm passed Glencore Plc last year as the world’s top supplier of the metal used in everything from electric-vehicle batteries to aerospace alloys.

CMOC has been expanding two huge mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where cobalt is extracted as a by-product of mining copper. Its output of the red metal in the first nine months rose 78%, and could hit 600,000 tons for this year “if this pace of production continues,” CMOC said on its official WeChat account.

The miner’s third-quarter net income rose 64% from a year earlier to 2.9 billion yuan ($410 million), largely thanks to the higher copper output and relatively strong global prices of the metal. Revenues rose 16% to 51.9 billion yuan.

CMOC is among several Chinese firms trying to lift output in central Africa’s copper belt. Preliminary exploration work has started for the western area of its Tenke Fungurume mine, and also for phase two of its Kisanfu project, it said.

In a separate statement, CMOC said it has signed a three-year supply and purchase agreement with Contemporary Amperex Technology Ltd. — the world’s top battery-maker and CMOC’s second-biggest shareholder — for metals including copper, cobalt, nickel and lithium.

CATL bought $546 million worth of products from CMOC in the first eight months of 2024, more than double the volume in all of 2023. CMOC said those were primarily nickel products.

(By Annie Lee)

The move sets a precedent for future private-sector missions beyond Earth’s orbit as it gives AstroForge both approval for their upcoming mission, Odin, and the green light to establish communication networks with their ground partners

The Odin mission, to be launched in January 2025, is part of the firm’s ambitious plan to harvest precious metals from asteroids, offering an alternative to Earth’s dwindling critical resources.

This is not the first launch for the company. In April 2023, AstroForge launched a small cubesat called Brokkr-1 on a SpaceX Transporter flight, but was unable to transmit the necessary commands to demonstrate its space-based minerals and metals refining technology. 

The company also ran into issues when preparing a second mission, originally called Brokkr-2 and later renamed Odin, which is now ready to be launched.

A third attempt is planned for late 2025, when the company will launch Vestri. The craft  is about twice the size of Odin and is designed to return to the targeted metallic asteroid and dock with it by using magnets, as it is expected the asteroid will be rich in iron.

If successful, AstroForge plans to send a fourth mission, which will focus on extracting and refining asteroids’ metals before returning to Earth.

The Huntington Beach, California-based company is the most advanced private asteroid miner to date. Two previous companies, Planetary Resources and Deep Space Industries emerged about a decade ago, but neither company arrived on any asteroids and were eventually acquired and rerouted to other endeavours.

Electra is currently looking to build a low-carbon hydrometallurgical cobalt refining complex in Temiskaming Shores, Ontario. Once complete, it would be the first facility of its kind in North America. The project is expected to cost around $250 million.

After a series of investments and government fundings, the required project funding was $60 million as of early September.

Once fully commissioned, Electra’s facility could produce up to 6,500 tonnes of cobalt per year, which it estimates could support the production of over 1 million electric vehicles annually. South Korea’s LG Energy Solution has announced it intends to purchase up to 80% of capacity over the first five years of operation.

“Given our objective of resuming construction shortly upon completing the project financing package, part of our preparations for the final phase of construction of North America’s only cobalt sulfate refinery is initiating some early works before winter sets in,” stated Electra CEO Trent Mell in a news release.

“Reducing heavy reliance on China in the EV materials supply chain continues to be a focus for North American policymakers,” Mell continued. “Electra’s Refinery is expected to be the first of its kind in North America, with the potential, when operating at full utilization, to produce enough cobalt sulfate for one million electric vehicles each year.”

The financing comprises $4 million in secured convertible notes and $1 million of Electra’s common shares priced at $0.543 per share. The notes can be converted into Electra shares at $0.62445 per share, representing a 15% premium.

Electra Battery Materials closed Friday’s session 4.5% higher at $0.55 apiece on the NASDAQ, for a market capitalization of approximately $31.3 million.

Importers of lithium, graphite and cobalt for use in manufacturing in the UK will be granted access to UK Export Finance, a state body that usually helps British exporters and their buyers with financing and insurance, people familiar with the matter said. They will only be eligible for the support if they hold long-term contracts with UK exporters, a move that will benefit the defense, aerospace, electric vehicle and renewable energy industries, they said, asking not to be named discussing measures to be announced in the Oct. 30 budget.

Western countries in recent years have been stepping up efforts to secure supplies of critical minerals that are crucial to advanced manufacturing but are currently dominated by China. Reeves’s initiative next week will make it easier for UKEF to secure finance contracts for suppliers in Commonwealth countries who have large mineral deposits, such as Australia, the people said. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is holding a series of bilateral meetings on trade and economic growth at the Commonwealth heads of government meeting in Samoa this week.

Reeves is preparing to unveil a package of tax rises and further borrowing in Labour’s first budget in 14 years. She’s seeking to raise some £40 billion ($52 billion) to help fund party priorities like the National Health Service and to plug a fiscal void that she blames on her Conservative predecessors. Reeves has also been debating changing the measure of debt used to inform the country’s fiscal rules, freeing up as much as an extra £50 billion of government spending on infrastructure.

While the government didn’t specify which companies it expects the move on export finance to benefit, manufacturers such as jet engine maker Rolls Royce Holdings Plc are significant users of imported metals, and Indian firm Tata Motors Ltd. is building a battery plant in southwest England that will require lithium supplies.

Labour is also relying on attracting on an influx of private investment into the UK to get the economy firing and spur the growth needed to generate more tax income. The government said it drummed up £63 billion at its international investment summit earlier this month, though some of that had previously been committed.

On Friday in Samoa, Starmer unveiled an additional £1 billion investment in the UK property market by Aware Super, an Australian fund and Delancey Real Estate. AustralianSuper, the country’s biggest pension fund, is also preparing to bolster its international investment team in London, expecting to manage £250 billion from its London office by 2035, the UK government said in a statement.

Starmer hosted a business meeting with AustralianSuper chief executive Paul Schroder, Bank of America chair Brian Moynihan and Lloyd’s of London CEO John Neal in Samoa on Thursday.

(By Ellen Milligan)

In combined battery capacity deployed – a better indicator of battery materials demand than unit sales alone – the global electric car market expanded by 22% so far this year. 

In total, 505.6 GWh of fresh battery power hit the globe’s roads from January through August, according to data from Toronto-based EV supply chain research firm Adamas Intelligence.

The robust growth rate also comes despite a noticeable swing towards hybrid vehicles, which have inherently smaller batteries and therefore contained metal. 

The combined battery capacity of plug-in hybrid vehicles steered onto roads globally for the first time this year is up 70% versus a must more sedate pace for full electric passenger vehicles of 15%. At the same time the average battery capacity of plug-ins is also rising, up 14% this year to 23kWh, more than a third of the average full electric vehicle.

For miners supplying the EV battery industry, the news remain negative: when pairing metals demand with prices in the supply chain, declines this year are brutal. 

The latest data based on EV registrations in over 110 countries show the sales weighted average monthly dollar value of the lithium, nickel, cobalt, manganese and graphite contained in the batteries​​ of the average EV based on global end-user registrations, battery capacity and chemistries.

Put it all together and the raw materials bill for the average EV is now down to $537 compared to $1,342 in August 2023 and a monthly peak of more than $1,900 at the beginning of last year, according to Adamas Intelligence analysis.      

The downtrend is led by lithium where the sales weighted average value per EV is down 75% over the past year to $236 and cobalt, which at little over $46 is 42% below the value reached in August 2023. Manganese is the only battery raw material in positive territory this year, up 3% but the raw material is also down 8% compare to the same month last year. For anode material, graphite loadings and values have held mostly steady at just under $26 per average EV.

The value of nickel in the average EV battery is down 26% as LFP battery chemistries continue to take global markets. LFP batteries represented 42% of the global total in terms of capacity deployed in GWh in August.

That compares to a 32% share during the same month last year, more than offsetting the long-running trend towards high-nickel cathodes, and the growing popularity of NCM batteries for larger plug-in and range-extending hybrids, where the energy density of nickel-based cathodes makes more sense given the weight of these vehicles. 

For a fuller analysis of the battery metals market check out the latest Northern Miner print and digital editions. 

* Frik Els is Editor at Large for MINING.COM and Head of Adamas Inside, providing news and analysis based on Adamas Intelligence data.

The move reflects the growing realization in Washington that efforts to combat climate change will be moot unless the US boosts its production of lithium, cobalt, and other critical minerals and curbs reliance on China and other overseas rivals.

Washington last December issued proposed rules for manufacturers to access the so-called 45X tax credit, created by President Joe Biden’s 2022 climate change law, the Inflation Reduction Act, which offers a 10% production credit for US-made products. Those draft rules excluded raw materials from the production costs in favor of processing. For example, the mining of lithium would not have received the credit, but the processing of that lithium into a form usable to build a battery would.

The mining industry cried foul, noting that processing is impossible without first extracting a mineral.

Citing “feedback from stakeholders,” the Treasury Department on Thursday reversed itself, saying that the “material costs and extraction costs” would be eligible for the tax credit under the final 45X rules, “provided certain conditions are met.”

“The Biden-Harris administration understands how important onshoring the production of critical minerals is to developing secure, clean energy supply chains,” Wally Adeyemo, the deputy Treasury secretary, told reporters on a call. “This will not only help incentivize additional mining, but will mean that mining that already exists is more profitable and they can make greater investments in those mines,” he said.

The final rules stipulate that the credit can only be obtained once an “eligible component” is created, essentially favoring mining companies that own processing facilities. The mining would have to take place in the United States, officials said.

“The action of extraction alone does not produce an eligible component,” the Treasury Department said in the final rule, which ran to 177 pages.

That may help Sibanye Stillwater, which mines and processes palladium in Montana and had pushed for the 45X expansion to offset cutthroat Russian competition. But several proposed US nickel mines, for example, would not be eligible because the US does not yet have a nickel smelter.

Ali Zaidi, the White House national climate adviser, gave the hypothetical example of a lithium hydroxide processor that also runs a lithium mine. That company would be eligible for a 10% per metric ton credit for the mining and another 10% per metric ton credit for the processing, he said.

“This is absolutely a game changer for our ability to lean into mineral security,” said Zaidi.

The credits would begin phasing out in 2030 and end after 2032 for clean energy components. Critical mineral credits will not phase out.

The National Mining Association, whose members include Lithium Americas, ioneer Ltd and other mining companies that do not process metals, said it appreciated the updated rules but was disappointed they were linked to processing.

“Treasury’s decision to limit the credit to those producers who also refine materials will prevent many important projects from benefiting from the credit as Congress intended,” said Rich Nolan, the trade group’s CEO.

(By Nichola Groom, Ernest Scheyder and Timothy Gardner; Editing by Leslie Adler)

• Stockpiling. The Trump Administration supported and the Harris campaign supports increased mineral stockpiling. According to the Department of Defense, the National Defense Stockpile (NDS), as of March 2023, only had inventories to cover 6 percent of the US military’s and essential civilian demand’s estimated material shortfalls in a hypothetical one-year conflict with China, followed by a three-year recovery. The president could tap the NDS Transaction Fund for mineral stockpiling, as well as the Defense Production Act (DPA) fund. The Eisenhower Administration used DPA funds for mineral stockpiling during the Cold War, and the president still has this authority (50 USC §4533). Importantly, the next administration’s Department of Defense should prioritize stockpiling minerals extracted and processed in the United States.

• Subsidies. The Trump Administration supported and the Harris campaign supports subsidies for critical mineral projects. The Trump Administration deemed critical mineral processing projects eligible for direct loans under the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing (ATVM) program, and the Biden-Harris Administration has loaned to such projects. The next administration’s Department of Energy could also deem mining projects eligible under the ATVM program by issuing a draft rule that adds “mining” to 10 CFR 611.2 “Eligible Project” (3). To specifically lower costs for US mineral processing facilities, the next administration’s Internal Revenue Service could propose new regulations extending the production costs covered by the Section 45X 10-percent production tax credit to feedstock acquisition, as has been urged by several organizations and mining companies.

• Procurement. Both the Trump and Biden-Harris administrations support increased domestic content requirements for government procurement. Under the authority of Executive Order 14005, the next administration’s Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council could issue a draft rule that adds a new part to the Federal Acquisition Regulations, requiring that acquisitions of specified clean energy technologies contain a certain threshold percentage of minerals extracted in the United States. For example, the draft rule could ultimately require that the General Services Administration—the federal government’s main source for procuring non-tactical vehicles—only acquire electric vehicles with batteries containing a high percentage of chemicals derived from US-extracted minerals. The next administration’s US Postal Service could adopt a similar content requirement in its Supplying Principles and Practices for electric vehicle acquisitions.

• Tariffs. Trump has pledged significant tariff increases, while the Biden-Harris Administration increased tariffs on several minerals imported from China. Domestic mineral projects like South32’s Hermosa manganese-zinc project support such trade protections to reduce US reliance on foreign minerals. The next president could (likely) impose tariffs on any mineral imports immediately under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The only prerequisite is a national emergency declaration, like the now-expired critical minerals executive order. If concerned about the legality of levying tariffs under IEEPA, the president could also direct the secretary of commerce to open a Section 232 investigation into mineral imports, although the tariff imposition would likely take several months to occur.

• Permitting. Both Trump and Harris support expedited permitting for building major projects. Previously, most US mining projects required Clean Water Act section 404 permits—which trigger the National Environmental Policy Act—but the Supreme Court’s decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (2023) circumscribed the areas requiring these permits, possibly lowering the permitting requirements for many mine projects. Determining whether a project requires a section 404 permit, however, can take up to one year based on the district. To expedite this process, the next administration’s US Army Corps of Engineers could issue a regulatory guidance letter directing district engineers to prioritize the review of approved jurisdictional determinations for sites of potential mining projects.

In short, the next president’s administration has significant unilateral authority to support US mining of critical minerals. First, it could increase mineral stockpiling by tapping both the NDS Transaction Fund and DPA fund for mineral acquisitions.

The next administration could also expand existing subsidies—like the ATVM direct loan program—to mining projects. For government acquisitions of clean energy technologies, it could set content requirements for US-extracted minerals.

The next administration could, additionally, impose tariffs on mineral imports of their choosing by issuing a national emergency declaration concerning mineral imports under IEEPA.

Lastly, it could expedite permitting by prioritizing jurisdictional determinations for sites of potential mining projects. On January 20, 2025, the next US president could—and should—take these actions to bolster US mining of critical minerals.

** Gregory Wischer is the founder of Dei Gratia Minerals, a critical minerals consulting firm.

Yet prices for all three EV battery inputs have fallen to such bombed-out levels that producers are curtailing output and deferring new projects.

This is partly a problem of oversupply. Explosive price rallies in 2021 and 2022 resulted in too much new production capacity being brought online too quickly.

But it is also a problem of demand.

The transition away from the internal combustion engine has by no means ground to a halt. Global new energy vehicle sales were up by 20% year-on-year in January-August, according to consultancy Rho Motion.

Rather, the mix of vehicles being sold and the evolution of battery chemistry have dramatically changed the metals demand dynamic.

The rise of the hybrids

Pure battery electric vehicle (BEV) sales have underperformed expectations due to buyers’ concerns about limited driving range and charging infrastructure.

By contrast, hybrid and plug-in hybrid cars, which have both a battery and internal combustion engine, have soared in popularity.

The increase in global sales of BEVs slowed to 10% year-on-year in the first eight months of 2024, while plug-in hybrid (PHEV) sales jumped 46%, according to Rho Motion.

This trend has been led by China, the world’s largest EV market. The key driver is the emergence of the extended range electric vehicle (EREV), a type of PHEV that uses the gasoline engine solely to charge the battery, giving the vehicle an extended driving range of more than 1,000 kilometres (621 miles).

EREVs now account for 31% of all plug-in hybrid sales in China, according to research house Adamas Intelligence, which expects them to enjoy similar success in both Europe and the United States.

Major automakers are embracing hybrids in all forms as a relatively low-cost transition technology between gasoline and pure electric vehicles.

Hybrids don’t need the same battery power as a BEV. Adamas calculates that battery pack capacity in a PHEV is a third of that in a BEV, which means a similar-sized reduction in the amount of lithium, nickel and cobalt used per vehicle.

Other metals, however, stand to benefit from the rise of the hybrids. Platinum and palladium, which are used to clean auto exhausts, have been granted an unexpected new lease of life.

Changing chemistry

While the new energy vehicle mix is changing, so too is battery chemistry.

Lithium-iron-phosphate batteries (LFP) have become the rising stars of the battery industry, accounting for around 40% of battery demand in 2023, more than double the share recorded in 2020, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

As with the new extended range hybrids, the LFP revolution is being led by China, where two-thirds of EV sales used this technology in 2023, the IEA estimates.

Chinese battery makers have turned what was once regarded as a low-power technology suitable only for short city commutes into a product that can compete with nickel-manganese-cobalt battery chemistries.

China’s CATL unveiled a new break-through LFP battery at the Beijing auto show in April. The Shenxing Plus boasts a driving range of 1,000 kilometres on a single charge, effectively eliminating range anxiety.

The only critical metal input for an LFP battery is lithium. It doesn’t require either nickel or cobalt, which makes an LFP battery both cheaper and more environmentally friendly than other chemistries.

The market has taken note. Demand forecasts for nickel and cobalt use in batteries have been steadily downgraded over the last year to factor in China’s pivot towards LFP technology.

Going global

European and US automakers have until now stuck with high-nickel chemistries in their EV batteries but that may be starting to change.

Both Ford Motor and General Motors have shown interest in using CATL’s LFP technology.

Moreover, while China has been the only mass-producer of LFP batteries since the 2010s, the core patents that enabled this dominance expired in 2022.

This has sparked interest outside China.

For example, the IEA has noted a surge of LFP investment in Morocco, which is home to the world’s largest phosphate reserves. Importantly, it also holds free-trade agreements with both the European Union and the United States.

A twisting road

Li Auto’s L6 family sports utility vehicle is an example of how hybrid and LFP technologies have come together to upset preconceived notions about the EV market.

Boasting what the company calls “the latest generation of lithium-iron-phosphate battery”, the vehicle has a range of 212 kilometres in pure battery mode and a range of 1,390 kilometres in mixed battery-engine mode.

The Li6 can accelerate from zero to 100 kilometres an hour in 5.4 seconds, which lays to rest any fear that LFP batteries can’t deliver the same performance as nickel-rich batteries.

Such products are good news for the broader energy transition, offering consumers a cheap, reliable alternative route to an all-electric future.

But they challenge the idea that the global auto market will jump straight from the internal combustion engine to a pure battery vehicle.

They also defy expectations that all EV batteries need nickel and cobalt to enhance power and performance.

What’s more, the battery revolution has only just begun. Battery makers are investing heavily in research and development with the goal of developing ever cheaper, more powerful batteries.

Even lithium is at risk of substitution from sodium-ion batteries as CATL and other Chinese companies such as BYD expand capacity for the new technology.

Sodium-ion batteries could cost up to 20% less than incumbent technologies and can be used for both stationary storage and compact urban EVs, according to the IEA.

They use no lithium but, depending on chemistry, need both nickel and manganese, which foreshadows the potential for more metallic twists in the unpredictable electric vehicle revolution.

(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, Andy Home, a columnist for Reuters.)

(Editing by Louise Heavens)

The European Union, rushing to develop a 9 million euro joint purchasing mechanism for critical minerals and energy, is choosing between eight bidders vying to develop a platform, documents showed and sources with direct knowledge told Reuters.

The bloc’s rationale for pooling together buying orders is that it would hand participants more leverage to achieve more favourable deals and prices for critical minerals essential for the green transition that trade in thin and opaque markets often dominated by China.

The EU aims to sign a contract by the end of the year and start developing sections of the platform for individual products early next year, an EU source who declined to be named told Reuters.

The winner of the tender would be paid about 9 million euros to set up and hand over a platform to the EU, documents seen by Reuters showed.

The eight bidders include major consulting groups Deloitte and PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), both of which declined to comment.

Germany’s Metalshub and Enmacc submitted a joint bid, telling Reuters they propose to use their existing trading platforms for metals and energy for the EU project.

EU Commission spokesperson Johanna Bernsel said an online consultation with 66 responses showed industry backing for the initiative.

“Overall, the survey revealed wide support for setting up a demand aggregation and matchmaking platform for strategic raw materials.”

EU officials are hurrying to develop the initiative, a key element in the EU’s Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA), on a mandate of Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, another source said.

“The imperative comes from the very top. Von der Leyen … wants people to move quickly,” said the source, who also declined to be named as they were not authorized to speak publicly.

The CRMA, which came into force in May, aims to boost domestic production and processing of critical minerals, whilst weaning off dependence on China.

Supply chain in place

Some possible users, however, say they already have supply chains in place for key inputs such as lithium and cobalt for electric vehicle batteries.

“Larger companies that have already established their supply chains for critical raw materials, such as battery raw materials, are unlikely to use this platform,” said Karol Bednarek, raw materials consultant with the German auto industry association VDA.

The platform may be useful, however, for sourcing materials certified as sustainable or niche materials such as germanium and gallium, he added.

The EU initiative is positive, but also has potential pitfalls, said the Spanish Association of Automotive Suppliers.

“Automotive suppliers typically source processed raw materials of very specific grades that require certification, which makes bundling demand more challenging,” Carolina López, head of sustainability for the group, told Reuters.

CEO Vincent Yang of Taiwanese battery maker ProLogium Technology Co said its cathode material suppliers have already signed procurement agreements with mineral producers.

ProLogium, in which Mercedes-Benz is an investor, plans to launch a 5.2 billion euro gigafactory in France in 2027 to produce its next-generation EV batteries.

Any platform must protect data regarding the specifics of what each buyer is requesting, which could expose trade secrets, Yang and other industry sources said.

Minerals and energy?

The EU has targeted critical minerals – vital for the energy transition for EVs and wind turbines – as a key sector to strengthen as the bloc seeks to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

But combining 17 critical minerals plus natural gas and hydrogen in the same platform would not work because the markets are very different, several industry sources said.

The new system is being patterned after an existing platform for joint buying of gas, AggregateEU, which was launched during the energy crisis in 2022.

The EU says it has been a success, but a report by the European Court of Auditors questioned the effectiveness of the platform.

(By Eric Onstad; Editing by Veronica Brown and David Evans)

“I had suggested that critical mineral MoU (memorandum of understanding) to be converted to a critical mineral partnership and become a starting point to become an FTA (Free Trade Agreement),” Piyush Goyal told reporters at a press briefing in New Delhi.

Earlier this month, India and US signed an initial pact to cooperate on strengthening supply chains in the two countries for lithium, cobalt and other critical minerals used in electric vehicles and clean energy applications.

The MoU fell far short of a full critical minerals trade deal that would allow India to benefit from the $7,500 US electric vehicle tax credit.

Minerals-focused trade deals are one way that the US President Joe Biden’s administration hopes to open up access for trusted allies to a $7,500 per vehicle EV tax credit introduced in last year’s climate-focused Inflation Reduction Act.

(By Shivangi Acharya; Editing by Jason Neely)

Explorers and developers often overstate the certainty of mineral resource classifications based on inadequate data, Desharnais said at an event in Vancouver on Wednesday. The practice has in some instances led to unexpected analyst downgrades, soaring costs and debt, and the derailment of promising assets.

“That classification debt, unfortunately, needs to get paid,” he told about 430 conference participants from 21 countries at CIM’s first Mineral Resources & Mineral Reserves conference. “The CEO may be walking around with a 3-million-oz. resource estimate, but they haven’t earned that classification with sufficient drilling. When the debt comes due, it’s often through painful reclassifications and revisions.”

Decade of missteps

Several recent projects have demonstrated the high cost of classification debt.

Rubicon Resources’ catastrophic 91% downgrade in resource estimates in 2015 stands as one of the most glaring examples. After it began initial production at the F2 gold deposit on its Phoenix property in Ontario’s Red Lake district, the company found the deposit to be uneconomic, shuttering the operation. It had not completed a feasibility study for the high-grade project.

The size of the downgrade blindsided investors and stakeholders, and the company had to undergo a painful restructuring to survive. Rebranded as Battle North Gold, Evolution Mining (ASX: EVN) bought it and its renamed Bateman project in 2021 for $343 million.

In 2018, Pretium Resources promoted the Brucejack gold project in northwestern British Columbia’s Golden Triangle, now owned by Newmont (NYSE: NEM, TSX: NGT, ASX: NEM, PNGX: NEM), as a high-grade gold deposit. Yet, the asset disappointed when gold production grades fell far below expectations.

The nuggety nature of the gold, with Brucejack’s steeply dipping quartz veins and erratic grade distribution, made it difficult to consistently meet production targets, forcing the company to push tonnage through the mill to compensate for lower-than-expected grades.

Aurora (2018), Rainy River (2019), and Gold Bar (2020) show how resource overestimation hurt Guyana Goldfields, New Gold (TSX: NGD; NYSE: NGD) and McEwen Mining (TSX: MUX; NYSE: MUX). They had to downgrade estimates mid-operation. This triggered mine plan revisions, soaring costs, production delays, and financial strain.

Grade versus geometric risk

Desharnais identifies two types of risk that contribute to resource misclassification: grade risk and geometric risk.

Grade risk reflects patchiness in ore quality, while geometric risk involves uncertainty about the size and shape of mineralized domains within the deposit.

Conditional simulations help assess grade risk, Desharnais said, but tools to quantify geometric risk are lacking.

Companies often overestimate deposit geometry without tighter drilling, leading to costly misjudgments.

“Sparse drilling gives us a simpler picture than reality,” he explained, adding that only closely spaced drilling can reveal the true complexity of orebodies.

Best practices

Mathieu Doucette, a senior geologist at ArcelorMittal (NYSE: MT), talked about the difficulty of classifying resources at Canada’s largest iron mine, the Mont-Wright iron ore mine in Quebec, producing continuously since 1974. Outdated data can affect current resource estimates. He illustrated how mixing in fresh drill holes helps manage geological risk as part of a dynamic model essential to avoid misclassification.

“The first thing [a QP] will do is akin to lighting a torch,” he said. “But everything on the edges is dark, and you can’t really see it. Drill holes are our ability to try and get some information, but sparse data hides the full picture.”

David Machuca-Mory, a principal consultant at SRK Consulting, said fixed models are risky. Deposits can be more unpredictable than they seem. Adaptive methods help ensure estimates reflect reality, reducing the chance of costly surprises.

“Even with dense drilling, some areas remain highly uncertain,” Machuca-Mory said. “Confidence intervals are large, and relying solely on drill spacing doesn’t always guarantee accurate classification.”

Cognitive biases

Desharnais said that misclassification is not just a technical problem; human psychology plays a significant role.

Anchoring bias makes companies stick with initial estimates despite new data. Authority bias pressures geologists and consultants to confirm favourable results to please management or investors.

“The consulting firm wants the next contract,” Desharnais said. “The CEO has family and friends invested and needs good news. These biases create a system where classification debt builds up across projects, only to be paid through painful revisions later.”

Owning up

Desharnais argued for more conservative resource models and said benchmarking against operating mines would help set realistic expectations. He suggested that technical reports include histograms that show the distance between drill holes and classified resources, he added.

“It forces the QP or CP to look at what they’ve done and ask: Does this make sense?” he said. “Transparent reporting would help prevent overly aggressive classifications, ensuring companies earn their resource classifications with sufficient data.”

Such measures may slow development, but they could also reduce the prevalence of misclassified resources in the industry. Desharnais urged geologists to scrutinize each block of material above the cut-off grade.

“Over-promising today only delays the inevitable correction tomorrow,” he said.

Chemaf — backed by Trafigura Group — spent nine months looking for a buyer before announcing the sale in June to China’s Norin Mining Ltd. Chemaf says it is still working to close that deal, but it has drawn opposition from the government and state miner Gecamines, which owns a key permit that Chemaf leases for its flagship project.

Now, Gecamines is interested in buying the company, according to a person familiar with the matter who declined to be identified because the information isn’t public. They didn’t provide any additional details beyond saying that an offer has been sent to Chemaf.

The battle over Chemaf highlights the efforts of Congo — now the world’s no. 2 copper producer — to assert more control over its mining sector, where China dominates output. Chemaf’s Mutoshi project is set to become one of the world’s largest mines for cobalt, which is extracted alongside copper and used in electric vehicle batteries.

If Gecamines were to acquire the Chemaf unit, it would be a departure for the state miner that’s typically been a minority partner in joint ventures. Congo’s government already owns 5% of the company.

The state firm and Congo’s mines ministry didn’t respond to messages seeking comment.

Chemaf declined to comment in response to questions about Gecamines’ offer. The company “remains committed to completing the proposed transaction with Norin Mining which will enable it to address its overdue loans and trade creditors while securing employment for its local Congolese workforce,” a spokesperson said by email.

Trafigura also declined to comment.

Chemaf has struggled to finish projects including Mutoshi following a slump in cobalt prices. It has said Norin’s proposed takeover would allow it to complete stalled works at two assets and fulfill obligations to creditors.

The company also owns dozens of undeveloped copper and cobalt licenses in Congo. Chemaf previously said it had about $690 million of debt outstanding as of September 2023.

(By Michael J. Kavanagh and William Clowes)

The US automaker on Wednesday said it would form a joint venture with Lithium Americas to develop the Thacker Pass lithium mine, North America’s largest source of the battery metal.

The move increases GM’s investment in the project by an additional $325 million to $950 million after an initial investment announced last year. It also gives the automaker a partial ownership stake in the mine and doubles its access to production to at least 20 years.

While the Thacker Pass JV should supply GM with a “significant” amount of its lithium, the company is open to other critical minerals deals on the continent, Jeff Morrison, GM’s senior vice president of global purchasing and supply chain, said in an interview on Thursday.

A majority of GM’s deals are for minerals supply, not necessarily JVs, and the automaker likely would continue that approach, he added.

“We don’t want to become a mining company,” Morrison said. “Our main goal is to build out a North American based, Western-allied, reliant supply chain. To do that, we have to pick partners and assets and figure out what they need to do to industrialize and be successful.”

GM also has agreements to buy cobalt from Glencore, an investment in nickel and cobalt miner Queensland Pacific Metals, and a lithium supply deal with Arcadium Lithium, among others.

The automaker in 2021 invested in Controlled Thermal Resources Hell’s Kitchen geothermal brine project in California, although that project has experienced delays.

Morrison said GM is “still working with them and still staying close with them.”

(By Ernest Scheyder; Editing by Bill Berkrot)

Read More: General Motors digs into mining business to lead race for EV metals

Chinese dominance over critical minerals used in technologies like smartphones, electric vehicles (EVs), and solar power has become a growing concern for the U.S. and other Western countries.

Currently, China refines 68% of the world’s nickel, 40% of copper, 59% of lithium, and 73% of cobalt, and is continuing to expand its mining operations.

This graphic by Visual Capitalist Elements visualizes the total cobalt supply from the top 10 producers in 2030, highlighting China’s dominance.

China’s footprint in Africa

Cobalt is a critical mineral with a wide range of commercial, industrial, and military applications. It has gained significant attention in recent years due to its use in battery production. Today, the EV sector accounts for 40% of the global cobalt market.

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) currently produces 74% of the world’s cobalt supply. Although cobalt deposits exist in regions like Australia, Europe, and Asia, the DRC holds the largest reserves by far.

China is the world’s leading consumer of cobalt, with nearly 87% of its cobalt consumption dedicated to the lithium-ion battery industry.

Although Chinese companies hold stakes in only three of the top 10 cobalt-producing countries, they control over half of the cobalt production in the DRC and Indonesia, and 85% of the output in Papua New Guinea.

Given the DRC’s large share of global cobalt production, many Chinese companies have expanded their presence in the country, acquiring projects and forming partnerships with the Congolese government.

According to Benchmark, Chinese companies are expected to control 46% of the global cobalt mined supply by 2030, a 3% increase from 2023.

By 2030, the top 10 cobalt-producing countries will account for 96% of the total mined supply, with just two countries—the DRC and Indonesia—contributing 84% of the total.

Atlas, which has developed a waste-free technology to process low-grade nickel for use in electric vehicle batteries, last year raised $27 million for its technology and said it aims to launch production at sites in Canada or the US by 2027 at commercial scale.

Atlas’ technology uses hydrochloric acid and caustic soda to leach the ore but, unlike some other methods, does not need high pressure or high temperatures and does not result in waste products or other emissions while increasing the amount of ore available for batteries by 50%, the company said.

Until now, saprolite ores, which account for approximately one-third of the world’s nickel resources, could not be processed into battery grade applications economically, which is what the Atlas process is targeting.

6K Energy said its UniMelt production system is able to deliver multiple IRA compliant Li-ion materials, including nickel manganese cobalt (NMC) and lithium ferrophosphate (LFP) battery cathode active materials (CAM), with strong specification performance meeting or exceeding industry requirements.

The company added that its LFP CAM is achieving over 160mh/gm capacity with exceptional efficiency, trending to 6,000-plus cycles while maintaining 80% capacity, while its single-crystal NMC811 is demonstrating performance trending to 3,000-plus cycles to 80% state of health.

According to 6K Energy, it delivers both NMC and LFP at a significantly lower cost than Chinese suppliers – backed by lower energy consumption and as much as 65% lower carbon footprint.

As outlined in the MOU, Atlas will continue to focus on the North American production by deploying its low-carbon process to produce mixed hydroxide precipitate (MHP) from its established access to nickel laterite sources. 6K Energy will focus on converting nickel salts to CAM with its propriety microwave-generated plasma in a closed-loop production process.

The joint work will provide the lowest carbon footprint impact in conjunction with a market leading solution for EVs and the automotive industry as a whole, the companies said.

Amnesty International points out that human rights risks in supply chains include potentially leaving communities exposed to exploitation, health risks and environmental harm caused by the rapid expansion of mines required for the metals used in batteries.

In the new report, Recharge for Rights: Ranking the Human Rights Due Diligence Reporting of Leading Electric Vehicle Makers, Amnesty International uses criteria based on international standards to comprehensively assess human rights due diligence policies and self-reported practices of 13 major EV manufacturers, issuing each one with a scorecard.

The companies were assessed against criteria based on internationally recognized frameworks, including the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, and the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct.

Mixed scores across the board

Amnesty’s scorecard, which is marked out of 90, assesses companies’ performance on criteria including commitment to human rights policies, risk identification process, supply chain mapping and reporting, and remediation.

The scorecard breaks down whether these car brands are meeting their human rights responsibilities and highlights which of them are failing to show that they are addressing human rights concerns.

Companies assessed are headquartered in China (BYD, Geely Auto), France (Renault), Germany (BMW, Mercedes-Benz, VW Group), Japan (Mitsubishi, Nissan), Netherlands (Stellantis), South Korea (Hyundai) and the United States (Ford, General Motors, Tesla).

None of the companies scored higher than 51 on Amnesty International’s human rights due diligence assessment, it said.

Mercedes-Benz ranked the highest (51) Tesla came in second (49) and Stellantis third (42) . BYD scored the lowest, (11), followed by Mitsubishi (13) and Hyundai (21).

Lacking transparency

In terms of supply chain mapping disclosures, BYD, Geely Auto, Hyundai, General Motors and Mitsubishi Motors scored the lowest, failing to provide detailed information about their supply chains, Amnesty International said.

The report revealed BYD does not disclose smelter, refiner, or mine site names. Geely Auto provided only general supplier locations without specifying mineral extraction sites.

Hyundai and Mitsubishi Motors demonstrated a similar lack of transparency, Amnesty International said, with no evidence of comprehensive supply chain mapping or mine site identification for cobalt, copper, lithium and nickel, making it difficult for stakeholders to verify how these operations affect nearby communities.

As global demand for battery minerals soars, the report calls for car makers to identify and mitigate human rights risks and as well as risks of abuse of Indigenous Peoples’ rights in countries where minerals are extracted such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Philippines.

“The huge rise in demand for the metals needed to make electric vehicle batteries is putting immense pressures on mining-affected communities,” Amnesty International’s Secretary General, Agnès Callamard, said in a media statement.

“The human rights abuses tied to the extraction of energy transition minerals are alarming and pervasive and the industry’s response is sorely lacking. Communities are suffering from forced evictions, health issues caused by pollution and difficulties accessing water,” Callamard said.

“As demand for electric vehicles increases, manufacturers must ensure people’s human rights are respected.”

Read the full report here.

An Appian spokesperson told MINING.COM on Monday that the company will seek $522 million, plus additional interest and legal costs accrued from the liability trial in July 2024 until the upcoming trial to determine the exact amount Sibanye will have to pay, in November 2025. “The total claim by the time of the quantum trial will be in excess of $600 million,” the person said.

Sibanye-Stillwater spokesperson James Wellsted told Reuters on Monday that Sibanye’s case is that Appian “is entitled to either no or significantly reduced damages.” 

Appian took Sibanye-Stillwater to court in 2022, after the South African precious metals miner scrapped a transaction to buy shares in Atlantic Nickel and Mineração Vale Verde, owners of the Santa Rita nickel and Serrote copper mines in Brazil, respectively.

The acquisition of the two operations was meant to boost Sibanye’s critical metals portfolio as it sought to diversify away from platinum and gold.

Sibanye cited a geotechnical event at Santa Rita as the reason for terminating the deals. Appian claimed the miner’s decision was based on an “incorrect assertion”.

In the ruling, handed down following a five-week trial, Justice Butcher said the geotechnical event used by Sibanye as reason for withdrawing from the deal was neither expected to be material nor reasonably anticipated to become so.

Butcher noted there was “no other basis on which Sibanye was entitled to terminate the sale and purchase agreements (SPAs).”

Appian said it plans to recover the full extent of its losses, including all interest accumulated since January 2022, when Sibanye walked away from the deal.

Should Sibanye fail to pay the full amount awarded in the November 2025 trial, Appian said it would pursue all available enforcement measures.

In a separate statement, Sibanye noted the company was successful in having Appian’s claim of willful misconduct dismissed.

“The judge ruled that Sibanye-Stillwater management genuinely believed that it was entitled to terminate the SPAs in what they perceived as the best interests of Sibanye-Stillwater,” it said.

The company argues that Appian could have sold the Santa Rita and Serrote mines to another buyer for a similar price, which in Sibanye’s view means that Appian cannot claim all losses to be covered by Sibanye-Stillwater.

“The judgment notes that Appian received multiple offers for the mines after Sibanye-Stillwater terminated the SPAs. Accordingly, Sibanye-Stillwater will continue to defend the claim vigorously at the trial in November 2025,” it said.

Atlantic Nickel’s Santa Rita open pit mine in the Brazilian state of Bahia is one of the few long-life nickel sulphide mines currently in production. It also yields copper, cobalt, and platinum group metals as by-products.

The company is advancing the mine’s underground extension as it transitions from open-pit to underground operations. This shift to higher-grade nickel is expected to boost production rates and extend the mine’s operational life to over 20 years.

At the end of the third quarter of 2024, the MINING.COM TOP 50* ranking of the world’s most valuable miners had a combined market capitalization of $1.51 trillion, up just under $76 billion from end-June, largely on the back of gold and royalty stocks.

The total stock market valuation of the world’s biggest mining companies is up a fairly modest 8% year to end-September and despite the good run is still $240 billion below the peak hit in the second quarter of 2022.  

Ranks, value of gold stocks swell

The value of precious metals and royalty companies climbed by a combined $42 billion, or 16% during the quarter and gold counters dominate the best performing ranks. 

Were it not for the limited tradability of stock in Russia’s Polyus, which lost some ground over the last three months despite gold’s stellar performance, bullion’s effect on the Top 50 would have been even more pronounced. 

Canada’s Alamos Gold joins the top 50 for the first time with a more than 31% jump in value, lifting it six places to number 48 with a valuation of $8.2 billion at the end of the quarter while the second quarter’s newcomer Pan American Silver (following its absorption of Yamana Gold) hangs on at no 50.

Alamos Gold last month raised its production guidance by over 20% for 2025-2026 with the inclusion of the Magino mine and its integration with its Island Gold operation in Ontario. The Toronto- based miner has long term ambitions to grow its production base to 900,000 ounces per year.

Uzbekistan is readying an IPO for Navoi Mining and Metallurgy Combinat – the world’s fourth largest gold mining company and significant uranium producer in 2025. NMMC debuted a $1 billion bond offering last week, marking the first global debt market issuance from a gold mining company since June 2023.

Navoi should easily join the ranks of gold producers in the top 50 thanks to ownership of the world’s largest gold mine, Muruntau, and annual production of 2.9 million ounces at grades and per ounce extraction costs the envy of the sector.  

The Muruntau open pit mine southwest of the Kyzylkum desert, originally developed during the Soviet era as a source of uranium, has estimated reserves of around 130 million ounces of gold. 

Goldilocks copper

Copper specialists, and those with fat gold credits, have gained a combined 36% year to date as the copper price continues to flirt with the $10,000 a tonne level, but momentum slowed dramatically during Q3 with the group contributing only $7.2 billion in added market worth during the quarter. 

Amman Mineral’s fierce rally also came to an abrupt halt during the quarter with the counter losing 18% over the three months and coming close to falling out of the top 10.

Investors who bought Amman, owner of the world’s third largest mine worldwide in terms of copper equivalent, at the IPO price in Jakarta a year ago, are still enjoying 400% gains since then, however. 

Southern Copper’s position as the world’s third most valuable mining stock seems entrenched after a double digit percentage gain in Q3 compared to a much more sedate performance by Freeport-McMoRan, which now has to gain a full $20 billion in market cap to haul in its Mexico City-based rival.

Light on lithium 

Rio Tinto’s vote of confidence in the long term future of the lithium sector (and its own ability to make M&A work) dominated the news at the start of the December-quarter but it’s worth noting that Arcadium’s more than 90% surge since the all-cash offer was first announced is not enough for the stock to enter the rankings.

Three lithium counters exited the rankings this year, Australia’s Pilbara Minerals and Mineral Resources and China’s Tianqi Lithium as the deep slump in prices for the battery metal continues to take its toll.  

Last quarter’s no 50, Ganfeng Lithium jumps six places after being swept up in the stimulus-induced rally on Chinese stock markets at the end of the quarter, while Tianqi’s performance so far in October should see it reenter the Top 50 in due course. 

Ganfeng was barely holding on at position 50 at end-June and with gold price momentum continuing and two gold mining companies waiting in the winds – Yintai and Alamos – only three lithium counters in the top 50 may be a reality for some time to come. 

After peaking in the second quarter of 2022 with a combined value of nearly $120 billion, the remaining lithium stocks’ market value has now shrunk to $34 billion.  

Iron ore ground down

Despite a modest improvement during the quarter, the mining industry’s traditional big 5 – BHP, Rio Tinto, Glencore, Vale and Anglo American – remain in the red for 2024, losing $24 billion since the start of the year. 

The big 5 diversifieds now make up 29% of the total index, down from a height of 38% at the end of 2022.  

Iron ore’s less than rosy outlook – the late boost China’s recent stimulus package notwithstanding – saw Fortescue once again feature on the biggest losers list and Cleveland Cliffs exit the ranking with the US iron ore miner’s 37% decline this year exacerbated by its inability to capitalize on the blocking of the Nippon-US Steel tie up. 

Iron ore’s representation in the top 50 have diminished in the last couple of years – Brazil’s CSN Mineração dropped out during Q1 this year while Anglo-controlled and separately-listed Kumba Iron Ore has lost touch with the top tier after a 40% fall year to date.

Click on image for full size table.

NOTES:

Source: MINING.COM, stock exchange data, company reports. Share data from primary-listed exchange at close Oct 4, 2024 close of trading converted to US$ where applicable. Percentage change based on US$ market cap difference, not share price change in local currency.  

As with any ranking, criteria for inclusion are contentious. We decided to exclude unlisted and state-owned enterprises at the outset due to a lack of information. That, of course, excludes giants like Chile’s Codelco, Uzbekistan’s Navoi Mining (the gold and uranium giant may list later this year), Eurochem, a major potash firm, and a number of entities in China and developing countries around the world.

Another central criterion was the depth of involvement in the industry before an enterprise can rightfully be called a mining company.

For instance, should smelter companies or commodity traders that own minority stakes in mining assets be included, especially if these investments have no operational component or warrant a seat on the board?

This is a common structure in Asia and excluding these types of companies removed well-known names like Japan’s Marubeni and Mitsui, Korea Zinc and Chile’s Copec. 

Levels of operational or strategic involvement and size of shareholding were other central considerations. Do streaming and royalty companies that receive metals from mining operations without shareholding qualify or are they just specialised financing vehicles? We included Franco Nevada, Royal Gold and Wheaton Precious Metals on the basis of their deep involvement in the industry.

Vertically integrated concerns like Alcoa and energy companies such as Shenhua Energy or Bayan Resources where power, ports and railways make up a large portion of revenues pose a problem. The revenue mix also tends to change alongside volatile coal prices. Same goes for battery makers like China’s CATL which is increasingly moving upstream, but where mining will continue to represent a small portion of its valuation.  

Another consideration is diversified companies such as Anglo American with separately listed majority-owned subsidiaries. We’ve included Angloplat in the ranking but excluded Kumba Iron Ore in which Anglo has a 70% stake to avoid double counting. Similarly we excluded Hindustan Zinc which is listed separately but majority owned by Vedanta.

Many steelmakers own and often operate iron ore and other metal mines, but in the interest of balance and diversity we excluded the steel industry, and with that many companies that have substantial mining assets including giants like ArcelorMittal, Magnitogorsk, Ternium, Baosteel and many others.

Head office refers to operational headquarters wherever applicable, for example BHP and Rio Tinto are shown as Melbourne, Australia, but Antofagasta is the exception that proves the rule. We consider the company’s HQ to be in London, where it has been listed since the late 1800s.

Please let us know of any errors, omissions, deletions or additions to the ranking or suggest a different methodology.

After buying mining assets around the world over the past two decades to secure metals needed for industrialization and more recently to meet its carbon emissions targets, China now wants a bigger say in how prices of those metals are determined.

But it has lost market share in metals futures trading and needs to persuade international investors to use the Shanghai Futures Exchange (ShFE), according to interviews with more than 10 brokers, traders, analysts, risk managers and consultants with direct knowledge of ShFE’s plans.

If successful, the push would help give Shanghai’s contracts benchmark status and upend the system for reference prices of industrial metals in place since 1877 when the London Metal Exchange (LME) started life above a hat shop in London.

ShFE benchmarks would eliminate the need for Chinese firms to link their physical contracts to LME prices and create a need for foreigners to trade on ShFE to influence reference prices in their contracts, shifting market sway from the west to China.

In recent meetings, the exchange told industry players the plan is high on its agenda and was likely to be put in place soon, but it did not discuss deadlines, two people said.

ShFE did not respond to requests for comment or to questions on timelines, amounts available to invest in this project, the challenges it faces or how success would be measured.

However, state media in June reported Wang Fenghai, general manager at ShFE, as saying: “Only through opening up can we draw in foreign investors, participate in the process of ShFE’s price establishment, therefore enhance price influence.”

Wang added that cross-border delivery capability was an area ShFE would focus on in terms of attracting global participation.

In a key step, the exchange has been looking to line up warehouses outside China to store metal delivered for copper contracts that were launched on its International Energy Exchange (INE) for foreigners in 2020.

ShFE has told industry stakeholders it intends to expand soon into international metals storage, two other sources with direct knowledge said, bidding to rival the LME’s global network of more than 450 registered warehouses that hold thousands of tons of aluminum, copper and other metals.

“They (ShFE) have a plan, they are coming out, they will list warehouses outside China, … the government wants this to happen,” one source familiar with the exchange’s thinking said.

While the metals industry has known since last year that ShFE plans to line up warehouses offshore, starting in Singapore, its latest comments to foreign firms suggest it is closer than ever to going ahead.

“A real price people want to use needs warehouse stocks the world over,” a source at a consultancy with knowledge of ShFE’s plans said.

Once ShFE makes a firm decision to offer metal storage outside China, the process of registering warehouses would be a matter of weeks if not days, as facilities already exist at ports that see large flows of metals, warehousing sources said.

ShFE will not need regulatory approvals for warehouses that can store metal deliverable against its contracts as long as they are located in free trade zones, so metal can be stored free of taxes until delivered to customers.

Singapore makes a good starting point as it is already a location for LME warehouses, which means the regulatory framework already exists.

All of the people who spoke to Reuters asked not to be named as their conversations with ShFE were private.

Rivals take market share

The Shanghai exchange faces a difficult road countering the LME, even as China consumes more than half of global supplies of copper, aluminum and zinc and produces large amounts of these metals.

“Any exchange that wants to achieve internationalization would face challenges … ShFE would face many challenges and various constraints if it aims to become a global pricing center,” Luo Xufeng, chairman of Nanhua Futures told Reuters.

Ultimately the exchange aims to list aluminum, zinc, nickel, lead and tin on the INE, sources with knowledge of ShFE’s plans said. Those metals are already traded on the LME, the world’s largest and oldest forum for metals, owned by Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing (HKEx).

On the LME, volumes for copper, essential in construction, power systems and electrical goods, have stabilized at around 60% of copper futures globally.

But ShFE’s domestic market has lost ground to US-based COMEX, part of CME Group, since 2015, with ShFE last year accounting for around 15% of copper futures traded globally, while COMEX’s share was 22%.And in the first nine months of 2024, trading volumes on ShFE’s INE copper futures have dropped nearly 43% from the same period last year.

“The only way to increase volumes is get more international involvement in ShFE,” a metals trader with direct knowledge of the matter said, adding that China’s government was behind the project to internationalize ShFE’s contracts.

The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC), which regulates ShFE, and the State Council, China’s cabinet, did not respond to questions from Reuters.

Meanwhile, LME is working on plans to list new contracts using ShFE prices and is set to approve the expansion of its metals warehousing network into Hong Kong before the end of this year.

LME said it intends to “deepen our collaboration with ShFE by working together in product innovation to better serve international participants in risk management and price discovery,” in response to a request for comment on its plans.

Hurdles for ShFE

ShFE’s ambition has been long in the making. When HKEx bought the London exchange in 2012 with a plan to turbo-charge revenues by expanding LME warehousing into China, ShFE told local authorities it could mimic the LME’s network and give China power and influence over global metals markets.

Some of that influence would come from more foreigners trading on ShFE having to hold yuan accounts, which would boost Beijing’s aim to gain global acceptance of its currency. Contracts on ShFE and its INE platform are priced in yuan.

“ShFE has been trying to do this for over 10 years,” said Dan Smith, head of research at Amalgamated Metal Trading.

“The biggest challenge is that there are still restrictions on the conversion of yuan to dollars.”

China’s currency exchange controls that limit the amount of money companies can take out of the country at any one time, partly a measure to control currency volatility, are potential deterrents for foreign investors.

Sources also mentioned fear of Chinese authorities’ policies designed to steer commodities markets and government market interventions, such as on margin requirements – the deposits of cash or collateral clearing houses need to cover potential losses.

“They don’t like volatility. They could double, triple transaction fees and margins overnight if they want. It makes people nervous,” a source familiar with the matter at a resources-focused fund said.

(By Pratima Desai, Siyi Liu and Beijing Newsroom; Editing by Veronica Brown, Tony Munroe and Sonali Paul)

The state has set up a special purpose vehicle (SPV) to push along investment, Mines Minister Paul Kabuswe said, as Africa’s second-largest copper producer aims to increase production of the metal to above 1 million tonnes by the end of 2025.

The SPV will license certain areas, and then seek partners for commercial agreements related to their exploration and mining, Kabuswe noted.

The Zambian government already owns several mining assets through ZCCM Investment Holdings. The plan is to more than quadruple the country’s copper output to 3 million tonnes by 2031.

The ambitious goal would require bringing into production multiple exploration projects the government is currently identifying.

Zambia expects its newly created SPV to control at least 30% of critical minerals production from future mines. The minister has however said in interviews with local media that the state company would have a 45% interest in any joint venture.

Subsidiaries of First Quantum Minerals (TSX: FM)) and Barrick Gold (TSX: ABX) (NYSE: GOLD) are responsible for the majority of Zambia’s copper production, accounting for approximately two-thirds of the total output in 2023.

Sites currently in the exploration phase – such as the Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos-backed KoBold Metals’ Mingomba project – are expected to provide 1.2 million tonnes of copper annually.

The plan includes streamlining processes to pay customs and taxes, along with a partnership with the United Arab Emirates, Mines Minister Kizito Pakabomba said in an interview. The nation is also planning to revamp a railway that can be used to transport minerals so cargoes can be more easily exported from a port along the Atlantic Ocean, positioned closer to US and European markets, he said.

Congo wants to “attract better investors, more investors and diversified investors,” Pakabomba said.

The ambitions come as the country continues to play a key role in international metals markets, while also finding itself at the center of a contest between China, the US and other countries vying for access to critical minerals. Congo recently overtook Peru to become the second-largest producer of copper and is by far the world’s biggest source of cobalt. Both commodities are key to the global energy transition.

The government is looking to make “strategic choices” about who runs Congo’s mines, the minister said, citing this year’s example of the state’s decision to oppose a proposed sale of Trafigura Group-backed copper and cobalt miner Chemaf Resources Ltd. to China’s Norin Mining Ltd.

“We’ve stopped this transaction,” Pakabomba said. If Chemaf remains set upon an ownership change, “we’ll consider with them the different options that could be taken,” he said.

Congo’s government has grown increasingly frustrated by its lack of influence over its mining industry, particularly in cobalt, a key ingredient in many electric-vehicle batteries. The country accounted for about three-quarters of global output of the metal last year, but a spike in production by miners in the nation — particularly China’s CMOC Ltd. — has pushed prices to eight-year lows.

The government is considering multiple options to have more control over cobalt exports, Pakabomba said.

Pakabomba also said that the country’s railway project is a big part of its strategy for the industry.

The government is evaluating how to improve a railway from the mining hub of Kolwezi to Congo’s border with Angola, which would then connect to a line terminating at the port of Lobito on the Atlantic Ocean, Pakabomba said.

The US has already committed $553 million to refurbish the Angolan section of the railway.

Congo’s foreign minister, Therese Kayikwamba Wagner, told Bloomberg that the country was considering a tender process to rebuild the Congolese side of the railway.

“I think that there are a lot of companies that are already lining up” with the project in mind, she said.

The rail-improvement project would cost $245 million over the first two years of construction, Pakabomba said.

“It will allow us to diversify the different export routes so that we are not only toward the East,” he said.

(By Michael J. Kavanagh and William Clowes)

US Strategic Metals (USSM) and Stillwater Critical Minerals (TSXV: PGE) have entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that includes lobbying collaboration to the US government, metallurgical and mineral processing development, offtake and logistics, and potential strategic financing.

Stillwater Critical Minerals is currently developing its flagship Stillwater West project, which is host to a nickel-PGE (platinum group elements)-copper-cobalt (plus gold) deposit situated in the Stillwater mining district of Montana.

USSM is planning to mine what it considers to be the largest cobalt reserve in North America. It holds an 18-year mineral supply of cobalt (plus nickel and copper) on a 7.3-square-kilometre site in Missouri, known as the Madison mine project.

USSM currently has an has an offtake relationship with Glencore (LON: GLEN), and in August was tapped by the Export-Import Bank of the United States for a loan package worth $400 million with a term of 15 years to support the development of its mining and metallurgical project.

The goal of USSM, said the company, is to build a large critical metal supply chain that provides reliable, traceable and conflict-free battery metals to the country.

“USSM aims to significantly expand production in the coming years and, as such, is successfully developing relationships with raw materials suppliers to allow it to meet rapidly growing critical metal demand,” CEO Stacy Hastie stated in a news release.

“Stillwater West fits this mandate extremely well, for its scale, grade and suite of critical minerals, nearly all of which the US is heavily reliant upon imports,” she said, adding that it is “one of the most important potential future sources of at least eight critical minerals”, and its development is “perfectly in line” with the US government’s mandate on securing domestic supply of these materials.

Stillwater Critical Minerals CEO Michael Rowley said the MOU has the potential to accelerate necessary engineering and metallurgical studies and follow-on to the company’s expanding base of government grant funding and partnerships with the US Geological Survey, Cornell University and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory for CO2 sequestration, hydrogen and hydrometallurgical studies.

“This MOU also reflects our broad alignment on ESG values and a shared vision for a large-scale, low-carbon American critical mineral supply chain based in an iconic and famously metal-rich US mining district that has produced critical minerals for over a century,” Rowley said.

ENRC sued the SFO, the agency’s former case controller for the ENRC probe and a former employee over alleged leaks during a decade-long criminal investigation into alleged bribery by the former FTSE 100 company. The SFO had denied the claims.

The SFO confirmed on Tuesday that the lawsuit at London’s High Court had been settled, saying: “Throughout this case we robustly defended the claims. A confidential settlement has now been agreed.”

An ENRC spokesperson said: “ENRC is pleased to report that a confidential settlement has been reached on the terms set out in the consent order.”

Confidential settlements are common in such cases.

Campaign group Spotlight on Corruption said the fact the settlement was confidential was “deeply troubling given the public interest in scrutinizing one of the SFO’s longest-running and most controversial cases”.

ENRC’s case against the SFO over alleged leaks was just one of several pieces of litigation arising out of the SFO’s investigation.

The SFO last year dropped without charges the probe it began in 2013 into alleged bribery by ENRC to secure mining contracts in the Democratic Republic of Congo between 2009 and 2012.

ENRC separately sued the SFO and its former lawyers, which led to the High Court ruling in December that ENRC was entitled to millions of pounds in damages.

The High Court found the SFO would not have launched the probe if the agency had not first induced ENRC’s former lawyer to act against its interests. The SFO has also been refused permission to appeal against that ruling.

ENRC had provisionally suggested it was seeking nearly $1 billion for losses it said were caused by the probe, which will be the subject of another trial, in 2025 or early 2026.

The company said in court filings made public last month that it had “taken a conservative approach” and was seeking approximately $300 million. The SFO is fighting that case.

A spokesperson for ENRC’s former lawyers Dechert said: “The firm was not a party to the claim and it would be inappropriate to comment.”

(By Sam Tobin; Editing by Hugh Lawson)

Officials from the National Development and Reform Commission offered little to investors, who had been expecting more stimulus measures on China’s first day back from a week-long public holiday.

Iron ore futures in Singapore fell more than 5% after rising by nearly that amount ahead of the briefing. Copper dropped to its lowest in two weeks in a sharp sell-off across base metals, while investor disappointment was reflected across wider Chinese markets.

“There had been talk that the NDRC may announce trillions of yuan in stimulus, but it came out with nothing at all,” said Hang Jiang, head of trading at Yonggang Resources Co. in Shanghai.

Iron ore futures are still up almost a fifth from late-September on optimism that Beijing’s earlier moves to boost the economy would end a period of deep gloom for China’s steel industry. Demand for the steelmaking ingredient has suffered amid a years-long property crisis.

Investors are still looking for more concrete signs that the government’s pledges will feed through to real economic activity. The NDRC officials said they would speed up spending, but their comments on investment and support for low-income groups were largely reiterations of previous pledges.

“The stimulus from China so far is not going to yield a significant turnaround for base metals,” Yonggang’s Jiang said. “We need to see stimulus feed into a real pickup in consumption before we can see big price rallies.”

Not enough

Copper and other metals have now wiped out most of their gains since Beijing rolled out a blitz of policy measures in the days before China’s Golden Week break. Tuesday morning’s briefing by the NDRC was announced over the weekend, triggering a wave of speculation about additional pro-growth moves.

Investors are “disappointed” after putting such high expectations on the NDRC briefing, said Jia Zheng, head of trading at Shanghai Soochow Jiuying Investment Co. Sustaining recent price gains requires more fund inflows, she said.

Iron ore fell 5.1% to $105.10 a ton on the Singapore Exchange as of 11:49 a.m. in London. Copper dropped 1.7% to $9,766 a ton on the London Metal Exchange, heading for its lowest close since Sept. 23. Aluminum, zinc, nickel, lead and tin all lost more than 2%.

Base metals should get support from the “material shift in China policy” since last month, Citigroup Inc. said in a note ahead of the NDRC briefing. But other global risks — from the US election to weak European growth and Middle East conflicts — would likely keep a lid on prices beyond the near term, they said.

True, the metallic path to net zero is proving much bumpier than expected. Prices of battery metals such as lithium, cobalt and nickel have bombed over the last year. Too much supply has been brought on too quickly just as electric vehicle sales have hit a slow patch.

But the promise of a future boom is undiminished.

Many key energy transition metals are expected to face supply shortfalls this decade, some as soon as this year, according to BloombergNEF.

The research house predicts the world will need three billion metric tons of metals between 2024 and 2050 to meet global emissions targets. The figure doubles to six billion in a net zero scenario.

It’s an enticing bull narrative, particularly when the current reality is one of weak metals demand as China’s growth engine misfires and Europe’s manufacturing sector contracts.

And it’s one that is starting to attract much broader interest. The fund industry, which has been underweight metals for over a decade, is now eyeing up the opportunities offered by the energy transition.

A potential return of heavyweight investment flows to the sector could be as powerful a price driver as physical supply shortages.

Lost decade

Fund allocations to the commodity sector have declined from around 10% to 2% over the last decade, according to Aline Carnizelo, managing partner at fund manager Frontier Commodities, who spoke on the investment panel at the LME’s Monday seminar.

The last great money surge came in the late 2000s, when investment funds, including giants such as The California Public Employees’ Retirement System, bought into the idea that commodities could serve as an effective inflation hedge.

The strategic allure was overlaid by the bull narrative surrounding China’s rise as an industrial powerhouse and the accompanying explosion in demand for industrial metals.

Things didn’t work out as expected.

The global financial crisis caused metals demand and prices to slump. A massive Chinese stimulus program fed one last bull surge but this was followed by years of decline.

LME copper hit what was then an all-time high of $10,190 per ton in February 2011. The ensuing downtrend played out for five years before the price finally bottomed out at $4,318 per ton in January 2016.

Meanwhile, successive rounds of quantitative easing by central banks during this period crushed interest rates, undermining the case for commodities as an inflation offset.

Metals revisited

Inflation expectations have changed significantly in recent years and fund managers are once again looking at commodities as a way of generating an inflation-adjusted return.

The ideal ratio of hard assets in an investment portfolio should be between 4% and 9%, according to Jigna Gibb, head of commodity index products at Bloomberg, who also spoke on the LME Monday seminar panel.

That’s at least double current allocations in a sector that is valued in the trillions of dollars.

Metals are the clear stand-out in the commodities sector thanks to their pivotal role in decarbonization.

Funds have so far sought exposure to the energy transition theme by buying equities in the mining and industrial technology sectors rather than the raw inputs, according to Michael Stewart at Legal & General Investment Management, one of Europe’s largest asset managers.

However, that’s changing, he told the seminar.

“We’re having conversations with our investors that we would not have had three or four years ago about considering energy transition commodities,” he said.

The opportunity for more investment in metals is “tremendous” and spans a wide spectrum of players from sophisticated pension and insurance funds to mass market retail investors, he added.

And the energy metals story dovetails neatly with the renewed interest in inflation-proofing fund returns.

In a greener economy metals such as copper, aluminum and lithium have the potential to be just as powerful future drivers of inflation as oil and gas are in today’s carbon-intensive economy.

Double-edged sword

A major reallocation of pension fund money to commodities in general and metals in particular might be welcome news for producers, traders and exchanges.

But the scale of potential global fund flows risks swamping what are small markets relative to equities or bonds.

Copper’s turbo-charged rally earlier this year may be a harbinger of the volatility to come.

Funds stampeded into copper amid much hype about limited supply at a time of accelerating demand from new energy applications such as solar, wind and electric vehicles.

Investors’ fear of missing out drove LME copper to a new nominal high of $11,104.50 per ton in May.

What followed was a buyers strike and aggressive de-stocking, including unprecedented exports of refined copper from China, normally the world’s largest importer of the red metal.

Funds sold out their long positions just as quickly as they had bought them and copper fell below the $9,000 level in early August.

The bull narrative, however, hasn’t lost any of its resonance. Copper was the top pick for attendees at last week’s LME seminar for the third year running.

If enough investors agree, copper’s potential for further price gains will become a self-fulfilling prophesy.

But that was how things looked in the 2000s as well. The reality proved very different.

(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, Andy Home, a columnist for Reuters.)

(Editing by Kirsten Donovan)

Iron ore, copper and zinc have all managed to retain or add to their price gains over China’s week-long holiday, with Beijing’s focus on measures to revive the property market, plus the unusual pace and intensity of announcements, buoying sentiment.

Until now, Beijing has struggled to jumpstart an economy that hasn’t fired on all cylinders since before the pandemic, in large part because of its only limited and piecemeal efforts. The flurry of measures since the end of September marks a recognition that more heft is required, prompting a spectacular stock market rally.

Chinese industry delegates to LME Week, a major metals conference in London, were optimistic that this could be the long-awaited turning point for the world’s largest importer of raw materials. But not every corner of the commodities complex has been as exuberant, and some analysts have already cautioned it’s too soon for a victory lap.

“Commodities have benefited from the support measures that continue to come through,” said Warren Patterson, head of commodities strategy at ING Groep NV. However, “we need to see property prices stabilize and we also need to see excess housing inventory return to more normal levels, before getting really optimistic.”

Chinese authorities delivered a triple dose of support late last month: the central bank unveiled a broad package of monetary stimulus; the Politburo vowed to steady the housing market and provide sufficient fiscal spending; and then leading urban centers eased property curbs.

An announcement over the weekend that the National Development and Reform Commission, China’s top economic planner, will hold a briefing on Tuesday morning has the market hoping for more.

“It’s not even what they have already announced,” said Saad Rahim, chief economist at Trafigura Group. “But I think it’s the intent as well to say ‘we can do another batch, and another batch after that’,” he told Bloomberg TV last week.

Taken together, the measures could total 5 trillion yuan ($712 billion), Rahim said. “This is large enough to move the needle.”

Iron ore has been the standout, surging by more than a quarter since Sept. 23, with industrial metals like copper and aluminum also doing well. The share prices of global mining majors — including BHP Group Ltd. and Rio Tinto Plc — have been caught up in the optimism.

Housing inventory

Despite the upswing, there are still plenty of concerns that Beijing will need to act even more forcefully if it’s to snap the economy out of its deflationary funk — and restore China to its status as the growth engine for major commodities.

“Most Chinese people’s assets are in housing, and that has dropped so significantly, that’s holding back their consumption,” Linda Yueh, adjunct professor of economics at the London Business School, told a seminar at LME Week. One of the things that China needs, more than an equity-market recovery, is to resolve property sector issues, she said.

China’s housing inventory is at 43 million units, plus a further 8 million under construction, Morgan Stanley analysts including Chetan Ahya said in a note. But with sales of only 8 million a year, lifting prices and reviving demand will be challenging, they said.

There’s also the limited scope of the impact of the measures outside metals — another note of caution for bulls and for those looking for evidence that changes at the top are trickling down. There would need to be more measures that increased disposable incomes to have an impact on foodstuffs and agriculture, according to Zhang Zhidong, head of agricultural research at Guolian Futures. In oil, traders have been taking most of their cues from the combustible situation in the Middle East.

Read More: Iron ore price rally continues

At the end of the third quarter of 2024, the MINING.COM TOP 50* ranking of the world’s most valuable miners had a combined market capitalization of $1.51 trillion, up just under $76 billion from end-June, largely on the back of gold and royalty stocks.

The total stock market valuation of the world’s biggest mining companies is up a fairly modest 8% year to end-September and despite the good run is still $240 billion below the peak hit in the second quarter of 2022.  

Ranks, value of gold stocks swell

The value of precious metals and royalty companies climbed by a combined $42 billion or 16% during the quarter and gold counters dominate the best performing ranks. 

Were it not for the limited tradability of stock in Russia’s Polyus, which lost some ground over the three months despite gold’s stellar performance, bullion’s effect on the Top 50 would have been even more pronounced. 

Canada’s Alamos Gold joins the top 50 for the first time with a  more than 31% jump in value lifting it six places to number 48 with a valuation of $8.2 billion at the end of the quarter while the second quarter’s newcomer Pan American Silver (following its absorption of Yamana Gold) hangs on at no 50.

Alamos Gold last month raised its production guidance by over 20% for 2025-2026 with the inclusion of the Magino mine and its integration with its Island Gold operation in Ontario. The Toronto based miner has long term ambitions to grow its production base to 900,000 ounces per year.

Uzbekistan is readying an IPO for Navoi Mining and Metallurgy Combinat – the world’s fourth largest gold mining company and significant uranium producer in 2025. NMMC debuted a $1 billion bond offering last week, marking the first global debt market issuance from a gold mining company since June 2023.

Navoi should easily join the ranks of gold producers in the top 50 thanks to ownership of the world’s largest gold mine, Muruntau, and annual production of 2.9 million ounces at grades and per ounce extraction costs the envy of the sector.  

The Muruntau open pit mine southwest of the Kyzylkum desert, originally developed during the Soviet era as a source of uranium, has estimated reserves of around 130 million ounces of gold. 

Goldilocks copper

Copper specialists, and those with fat gold credits, have gained a combined 36% year to date as the copper price continues to flirt with the $10,000 a tonne level but momentum slowed dramatically during Q3 with the group contributing only $7.2 billion in added market worth during the quarter. 

Amman Mineral’s fierce rally also came to an abrupt halt during the quarter with the counter losing 18% over the three months and coming close to falling out of the top 10.

Investors who bought Amman, owner of the world’s third largest mine worldwide in terms of copper equivalent, at the IPO price in Jakarta a year ago, are still enjoying 400% gains since then however. 

Southern Copper’s position as the world’s third most valuable mining stock seems entrenched after a double digit percentage gain in Q3 compared to a much more sedate performance by Freeport-McMoRan which now has to gain a full $20 billion in market cap to haul in its Mexico City-based rival.

Light on lithium 

Rio Tinto’s vote of confidence in the long term future of the lithium sector (and its own ability to make M&A work) dominated the news at the start of the December-quarter but it’s worth noting that Arcadium’s more than 90% surge since the all-cash offer was first announced are not enough for the stock to enter the rankings.

Three lithium counters exited the rankings this year, Australia’s  Pilbara Minerals and Mineral Resources and China’s Tianqi Lithium as the deep slump in prices for the battery metal continues to take its toll.  

Last quarter’s no 50, Ganfeng Lithium jumps six places after being swept up in the stimulus-induced rally on Chinese stock markets at the end of the quarter while Tianqi’s performance so far in October should see it reenter the Top 50 in due course. 

Ganfeng was barely holding on at position 50 at end-June and with gold price momentum continuing and two gold mining companies waiting in the winds – Yintai and Alamos – only three lithium counters in the top 50 may be a reality for some time to come. 

After peaking in the second quarter of 2022 with a combined value of nearly $120 billion, the remaining lithium stocks’ market value has now shrunk to $34 billion.  

Iron ore ground down

Despite a modest improvement during the quarter, the mining industry’s traditional big 5 – BHP, Rio Tinto, Glencore, Vale and Anglo American – remain in the red for 2024, losing $24 billion since the start of the year. 

The big 5 diversifieds now make up 29% of the total index, down from a height of 38% at the end of 2022.  

Iron ore’s less than rosy outlook – the late boost China’s recent stimulus package notwithstanding – saw Fortescue once again feature on the biggest losers list and Cleveland Cliffs exit the ranking with the US iron ore miner’s 37% decline this year exacerbated by its inability to capitalize on the blocking of the Nippon-US Steel tie up. 

Iron ore’s representation in the top 50 have diminished in the last couple of years – Brazil’s CSN Mineração dropped out during Q1 this year while Anglo-controlled and separately-listed Kumba Iron Ore has lost touch with the top tier after a 40% fall year to date.

Click on image for full size table.

NOTES:

Source: MINING.COM, stock exchange data, company reports. Share data from primary-listed exchange at close Oct 4, 2024 close of trading converted to US$ where applicable. Percentage change based on US$ market cap difference, not share price change in local currency.  

As with any ranking, criteria for inclusion are contentious. We decided to exclude unlisted and state-owned enterprises at the outset due to a lack of information. That, of course, excludes giants like Chile’s Codelco, Uzbekistan’s Navoi Mining (the gold and uranium giant may list later this year), Eurochem, a major potash firm, and a number of entities in China and developing countries around the world.

Another central criterion was the depth of involvement in the industry before an enterprise can rightfully be called a mining company.

For instance, should smelter companies or commodity traders that own minority stakes in mining assets be included, especially if these investments have no operational component or warrant a seat on the board?

This is a common structure in Asia and excluding these types of companies removed well-known names like Japan’s Marubeni and Mitsui, Korea Zinc and Chile’s Copec. 

Levels of operational or strategic involvement and size of shareholding were other central considerations. Do streaming and royalty companies that receive metals from mining operations without shareholding qualify or are they just specialised financing vehicles? We included Franco Nevada, Royal Gold and Wheaton Precious Metals on the basis of their deep involvement in the industry.

Vertically integrated concerns like Alcoa and energy companies such as Shenhua Energy or Bayan Resources where power, ports and railways make up a large portion of revenues pose a problem. The revenue mix also tends to change alongside volatile coal prices. Same goes for battery makers like China’s CATL which is increasingly moving upstream, but where mining will continue to represent a small portion of its valuation.  

Another consideration is diversified companies such as Anglo American with separately listed majority-owned subsidiaries. We’ve included Angloplat in the ranking but excluded Kumba Iron Ore in which Anglo has a 70% stake to avoid double counting. Similarly we excluded Hindustan Zinc which is listed separately but majority owned by Vedanta.

Many steelmakers own and often operate iron ore and other metal mines, but in the interest of balance and diversity we excluded the steel industry, and with that many companies that have substantial mining assets including giants like ArcelorMittal, Magnitogorsk, Ternium, Baosteel and many others.

Head office refers to operational headquarters wherever applicable, for example BHP and Rio Tinto are shown as Melbourne, Australia, but Antofagasta is the exception that proves the rule. We consider the company’s HQ to be in London, where it has been listed since the late 1800s.

Please let us know of any errors, omissions, deletions or additions to the ranking or suggest a different methodology.

The Commerce Department said in a statement that the memorandum of understanding (MOU), signed during Goyal’s visit to Washington, was aimed at building resilience in the sector for each country.

“Priority areas of focus include identifying equipment, services, policies and best practices to facilitate the mutually beneficial commercial development of US and Indian critical minerals exploration, extraction, processing and refining, recycling and recovery,” Commerce said.

Goyal, speaking at a Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington after the signing, described the MOU as a multi-dimensional partnership that would include open supply chains for materials, technology development and investment flows to promote green energy.

He said the US and India would also need to include third countries in their engagement, including mineral-rich countries in Africa and South America.

The MOU, which Reuters first reported was in the works on Monday, falls far short of a full critical minerals trade deal that would allow India to benefit from the $7,500 US electric vehicle tax credit.

Japan last year signed a deal with the US Trade Representative’s office that allows Japanese automakers to more fully participate in the credit, aiming to reduce US-Japanese mineral dependence on China and prohibiting bilateral export controls on lithium, nickel, cobalt, graphite, manganese and other minerals.

(By David Lawder; Editing by David Gregorio)

The mining industry will require $2.1 trillion in new investments by 2050 to meet the raw material demands of a net-zero emissions world, according to BloombergNEF’s (BNEF) annual Transition Metals Outlook.

Despite a decade of growth in metals supply, BNEF reports that current raw material availability remains insufficient to meet the rising demand.

The report highlights that critical energy transition metals, including aluminum, copper and lithium, could face supply deficits this decade — some as early as this year.

According to BNEF’s Economic Transition Scenario (ETS), which assumes no new policy support and is driven by the cost competitiveness of technologies, the world may need 3 billion tonnes of metals between 2024 and 2050 to support low-carbon solutions such as electric vehicles, wind turbines, and electrolyzers. That figure could rise to 6 billion tonnes to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.

Recycling could help alleviate some of the pressure, with BNEF predicting that output from secondary sources will become an integral part of the energy transition metals supply chain.

“Good government policies are crucial to the industry’s success. For batteries and stationary storage, governments need to establish collection networks, set recovery rate requirements, develop frameworks to trace individual cells, and provide guidelines for second-life battery management,” BNEF metals and mining associate Allan Ray Restauro said.

The pace of demand growth will vary across regions.

In China, for instance, consumption outpaced the global average between 2020 and 2023, but the country’s demand for energy transition metals is expected to peak in 2030. Southeast Asia is projected to become the fastest-growing market for these metals during the 2030s, according to BNEF’s ETS.

Read More: Lack of capital rises to top risk in EY mining survey

Congo’s mines minister said the spat between authorities and a Glencore-owned copper and cobalt mine revolves around royalty payments the unit makes to Gertler, who the US sanctioned in 2017 over alleged corruption. Congo now says part of the funds should have been paid to the state instead.

Bloomberg reported last week that a tax agency says Kamoto Copper Co. owes the state hundreds of millions of dollars in a royalties row. The involvement of Gertler — who still receives royalties from Congo projects including Kamoto — is a reminder of the challenges his ongoing presence poses in the key producer of minerals needed for the energy transition.

It also highlights why Western firms have resisted US encouragement to invest in Congo, where many mines are owned by Chinese firms. Washington wants the West to finance projects there to tackle Beijing’s dominance in critical metals, but progress has been hit by a range of issues. They include Congo’s history of demanding large one-off payments, and the continued involvement of Gertler that makes some investors wary of doing business there because of the sanctions.

Congo’s high-grade deposits of copper and cobalt are some of the world’s most important sources of so-called green metals. President Joe Biden’s administration views the country as a key battleground in its drive to reduce China’s dominance in mining and processing critical minerals.

Kamoto is one of the largest mines in Congo. A tax agency known by its French acronym DGRAD says it owes the state more than €800 million ($885 million), people familiar with the matter have said. After the unit’s local bank accounts were frozen earlier this year, tax collection staff recently also briefly sealed off a warehouse where the company was storing metal, the people said.

The payments at the center of the spat relate to transfers Kamoto makes to Gertler, Mines Minister Kizito Pakabomba said in an interview in New York on Friday. (Kamoto also pays a different set of royalties based on sales which go directly to the government.)

“These are Dan Gertler’s royalties,” he said, declining to go into further detail about the dispute. The impasse is moving in the right direction and an agreement between the parties “has almost been reached,” Pakabomba said.

Mine payments

DGRAD’s position is that local laws mean that 50% of the royalties paid to Gertler should go to the nation’s Treasury, according to people familiar with the matter who asked not to be identified.

A Glencore spokesman declined to comment. A spokesman for Congo’s finance ministry, which oversees DGRAD, didn’t respond to questions from Bloomberg, including on why it’s requesting the funds from Kamoto rather than Gertler.

Gertler’s Ventora Group said that it’s aware of a dispute, but that it is a matter between the tax agency and Kamoto. “It does not involve Ventora Group, we do not know what it relates to, any other details or the merits of such claim.”

Gertler kept royalty rights in Kamoto and another nearby mine belonging to Glencore — equal to about 2.5% of revenue — after selling his minority holdings before he was sanctioned by the US. He also benefits from a similar arrangement at another project owned by Eurasian Resources Group.

Under a deal cut with Congo’s government in 2022, he agreed to hand back some assets in exchange for help lobbying the US to lift sanctions, though still retained royalties. Gertler, who acquired the Kamoto rights from Congo’s state miner Gecamines about a decade ago, has never been charged with a crime and denies any wrongdoing.

The current dispute with tax authorities isn’t the first time Gertler’s royalties have caused problems for Glencore. After halting transfers amid sanctions, the company resumed payments to him in 2018 — in euros — following a lawsuit filed by Gertler. Glencore said at the time the decision was the “only viable option to avoid the material risk of seizure” of its Congolese mines.

(By William Clowes, Michael J. Kavanagh and Thomas Biesheuvel)

“With one of our best holes to date, it is becoming more evident that the Lion discovery is substantially bigger than we originally envisioned,” chief executive officer Terry Lynch said in the statement.

The latest drill, which reached the mineralized zone at a depth of 118 meters, builds on the company’s previous exploration work. By incorporating insights from earlier drill holes, Power Nickel adjusted its strategy, moving further west and shallower. The result was a successful hit, sparking optimism about the future of the project.

“This is very encouraging for lots of reasons: size of the zone, grade, depth of the intersection, and the move westward,” Lynch said.

Power Nickel entered the project in 2021. The Toronto-based junior plans to develop NISK, in Quebec’s James Bay region, as Canada’s first carbon neutral nickel mine by using carbon capture and hydroelectric power. Provincial and federal tax breaks cover half of exploration costs as the company works towards a feasibility study before year-end.

In addition to expanding the Lion Zone via targeted drilling, Power Nickel is also in the process of compiling information from several data sources, including downhole electromagnetics, gravity and geochemical data.

The goal is to determine the potential of NISK, which is known for its rich deposits of nickel, copper, cobalt and other critical minerals. As demand for these materials grows, particularly for use in electric vehicle batteries, the project’s allure is expected to increase.

So far, it has attracted investments from Ivanhoe Mines (TSX: IVN) founder and co-chair Robert Friedland and from mining magnate Rob McEwen, founder and CEO of McEwen Mining (TSX, NYSE: MUX).

Power Nickel’s shares have soared this year, climbing almost 230% to date at C$0.79 each. That leaves the explorer with a market capitalization of C$151.25 million ($112m).

The logging of the document, which the company expects to complete within the next six weeks, outlines the project’s potential environmental, social and economic impacts. It also includes mitigation measures to address any potential negative impact, asserting the company’s commitment to responsible mining practices.

The assessment is a critical requirement for obtaining federal permits, which Canada Nickel is targeting to secure by 2025. 

The Crawford project is expected to begin production in 2027, positioning the company as a key player in supplying the minerals needed for a low-carbon economy.

The proposed operation will consist of two open pits complemented by an on-site mill, to be completed in two phases to allow for throughput ramp-up, the feasibility study showed. Total capital cost for the two phases is estimated at $3.5 billion.

Over a 41-year project life, total metal production is calculated at 3.54 billion lb. of nickel, 52.9 million lb. of cobalt, 490,000 oz. of palladium and platinum, 58 million tonnes of iron, and 6.2 million lb. of chromium.

Peak production at Crawford nickel mine is expected in year 11, when autonomous trucks and remotely operated shovels are fully integrated into the operation.

Canada Nickel has the backing of top players in the mining and batteries markets, including South Korea’s Samsung SDI. The Toronto-based miner has also attracted the interest of Agnico Eagle Mines (TSX, NYSE: AEM), Canada’s largest gold producer, which now owns 12% of the company.

Chief executive Mark Selby emphasized the importance of stakeholder collaboration, noting that input from Indigenous Nations, local communities, government agencies, and experts was central to shaping the document. 

“We’re grateful for the strong partnerships we’ve built with Indigenous Nations and community stakeholders, whose contributions have been essential in shaping the submission,” Selby said. “Their input helped ensure the project aligns with our shared values of sustainability and regional economic growth.”

As global demand for critical minerals increases, the Crawford project is expected to play an important role in the transition to a low-carbon economy. Nickel, in particular, is a key component in the production of batteries for electric vehicles (EVs), making Canada Nickel project’s progress crucial to meeting rising global demand.

Crawford hosts one of the world’s largest resources of the battery metal, totalling 2.46 billion tonnes at 0.24% nickel for 13.3 billion pounds of contained nickel, according to its feasibility study. This pegged the project’s after-tax net present value (8% discount) at $2.6 billion and internal rate of return at 18.3%.

“We need about $1 trillion in investment to produce enough metals for the energy transition,” Theo Yameogo, EY Americas and Canada Mining and Metals Leader told The Northern Miner. “We haven’t seen that coming in. Now it’s the #1 (risk) because people are really worried. We’ve seen some M&A, but we haven’t seen direct investment in the mining sector.”

The report, based on an annual survey of senior mining and metals leaders from organizations with $1 billion in revenue, outlines the top 10 business risks and opportunities for mining and metals as 2025 approaches. EY conducted the survey in June and July, collecting 353 responses.

Second in the ranking is environmental stewardship, and companies focus on preserving nature amid mining activity; and in third is geopolitics, such as the United States’ plan to source and process critical minerals from countries outside China’s influence; in fourth place is resource depletion; and in fifth is miners’ licence to operate.

Costs have increased not just because of inflation, but also because community standards are changing, Yameogo said. For example, miners in Chile need to build desalination plants rather than using fresh water that local communities depend on.

“It makes mines more costly to build. You have capital to do just business as usual, capital for the energy transition and capital for the new standard of mines,” he said.

Mining companies are seeking a wider range of capital sources, the EY report states, while companies are also considering partnerships or JVs to help reduce risks and financing requirements. Among respondents, 41% said they were considering commodity traders as a source of funds, 40% supplier funding and 40% export credit finance.

Less cash, more M&A

As miners struggle to secure new capital, it shows the need to change gears in their strategy, the report states.

Yameogo explains that compared to several years ago, capital strategies have shifted towards being more productive with less capital, and companies are streamlining their business to focus on a smaller number of metals.

“In the last year and a bit, the separation of businesses is now a big deal,” he said. “Some companies say, ‘we’ll just do copper now,’ or ‘we’re going to do base metals and get rid of our coal.”

Another trend emerging among critical minerals portfolios is tendencies towards M&A, and EY says it expects to see more consolidation of copper assets by majors as the demand outlook for the red metal is strong.

The report cites another April CEO survey conducted by EY, which showed that all mining and metals respondents plan to do some type of transaction over the next year. Of those surveyed, 76% said they expect to pursue divestments, spin-offs or initial public offerings; 54% expect to do M&A and 33% expect to pursue joint ventures and strategic partnerships.

Yameogo suggests that miners view the capital risk as connected with the other risks in the ranking, especially if they’re looking to finance projects in geopolitically or environmentally risky jurisdictions.

“So even if capital is the biggest risk for 2025, we need to understand that it’s because there’s other pieces that are impacting capital,” he said. “If you’re raising capital, you better make sure that your environmental stewardship is solid, right? We need to transform the sector to be ready for the energy transition.”

Environmental stewardship

Environmental, social and governance (ESG) priorities came second in this year’s risk ranking, down from first last year, but this year the “E” has taken on more prominence, EY reported.

“Nature-positive initiatives” or a focus on reversing the loss of nature were a goal of 46% of respondents, and company sustainability teams are dealing with growing expectations around performance.

That focus comes as new standards such as the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) and Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (ISTM) take shape.

The EY study found that 44% of respondents said waste management would be the top concern for investors in the next 12 months. That focus was broad and went beyond tailings to include improving mine performance with higher strip ratios, using closed loops to cut waste and emissions and reprocessing tailings.

But by the same token, the “G” in ESG fell out of the top 10 risks in the report, with EY stating that its de-prioritization compared to last year was unexpected and a “gap” for miners.

A focus on governance is important because board-level oversight is needed to ensure projects aren’t subject to accusations of greenwashing.

New risks this year

Resource depletion is a new risk on the list this year. Declining ore grades are raising the cost of extraction, while high-grade resources have almost been mined out, EY states.

EY suggests miners consider investing in new exploration technologies, replacing lower reserves through M&A, improving productivity with better techniques and processing, and exploring in settings such as on the ocean floor or on asteroids.

Another new risk on the list, in eighth place, is new projects, which will be necessary if the world is to meet the huge demand for critical minerals in the energy transition.

Numerous challenges complicate the task of opening new mines, such as regulatory issues, high taxes, lack of standardization, inflation and lower ore grades, which raise costs.

The report suggests miners build deeper connections with stakeholders to strengthen the licence to operate; derisk capital projects by integrating across supply chains to lower costs; and develop new talent pools to access skills needed for sustainability, automation and electrification which might be outside the traditional mining industry.

As Ambatovy continues to assess the impact on operations and the timeline for recovery, traders said that the incident could tighten supplies in the cobalt market if the stoppage goes on for more than two months.

The cause of the damage to the slurry pipeline, which occurred on Sept. 25, is being investigated, Sumitomo said in a statement on Monday, adding that no injuries were reported.

The Japanese trading house has been struggling to stabilize production and improve profitability at the Ambatovy project, which launched in 2005.

The project produced about 8,000 metric tons of nickel during the April-June quarter, down from about 10,000 tons a year earlier, Sumitomo said in July. It expects annual production of 35,000 tons for the year to March 31.

It did not disclose its cobalt production. According to Darton Commodities, Ambatovy produced 3,390 tons of cobalt last year.

Sumitomo owns a 54.2% stake in the project companies – Ambatovy Minerals, a mining company, and Dynatec Madagascar, a refining company – while the remaining stake is held by Korea Mine Rehabilitation and Mineral Resources.

The Ambatovy nickel project companies filed a debt restructuring plan with a court in London in August. Sumitomo Corp said at that time that the filing was part of their effort to ensure the stable and efficient operation of the project, not a liquidation process.

(By Pratima Desai and Polina Devitt; Editing by Jan Harvey)